t3c
Junior Member
Posts • 1,570
Likes • 703
July 2011
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by t3c on Apr 11, 2014 9:11:25 GMT 1, Quite an interesting read, not sure how viable it is but the uptake seems relatively decent. 1 share in Heavy Weaponry will set you back £120, Writing on the Wall £44. I guess it's like an art stock exchange of sorts and if you own a quarter of any piece you can take it home for 3 months.
Quite an interesting read, not sure how viable it is but the uptake seems relatively decent. 1 share in Heavy Weaponry will set you back £120, Writing on the Wall £44. I guess it's like an art stock exchange of sorts and if you own a quarter of any piece you can take it home for 3 months. |
|
Pipes
Junior Member
Posts • 2,430
Likes • 2,857
January 2012
|
|
|
eschiff
Junior Member
Posts • 2,062
Likes • 995
January 2010
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by eschiff on Apr 11, 2014 11:09:05 GMT 1, interesting idea...never seen this banksy before they have on their site
www.myartinvest.com/en/banksy/292-daddy-s-back.html
Only 87k to buy a quarter of the shares of it and have it on your wall for 3 months 
|
|
M
Junior Member
Posts • 1,998
Likes • 581
February 2011
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by M on Apr 11, 2014 11:14:00 GMT 1, Quite an interesting read, not sure how viable it is but the uptake seems relatively decent. 1 share in Heavy Weaponry will set you back £120, Writing on the Wall £44. I guess it's like an art stock exchange of sorts and if you own a quarter of any piece you can take it home for 3 months.
here we have only one winner: gallery. They will get commision twice. First when they are selling stock and secondly when they are selling artwork. This is ponzi sheme and nothing more and banksy will finally destroy them all when his prints will come out again.Better out
Quite an interesting read, not sure how viable it is but the uptake seems relatively decent. 1 share in Heavy Weaponry will set you back £120, Writing on the Wall £44. I guess it's like an art stock exchange of sorts and if you own a quarter of any piece you can take it home for 3 months. here we have only one winner: gallery. They will get commision twice. First when they are selling stock and secondly when they are selling artwork. This is ponzi sheme and nothing more and banksy will finally destroy them all when his prints will come out again.Better out |
|
|
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by Jeezuz Jones Snr on Apr 11, 2014 11:15:41 GMT 1, Exactly
Exactly
|
|
Art Fan 2011
Junior Member
Posts • 4,671
Likes • 1,952
February 2012
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by Art Fan 2011 on Apr 11, 2014 11:18:11 GMT 1, Interesting concept, not sure its one that will take off however.
Interesting concept, not sure its one that will take off however.
|
|
|
|
Cedric Mnich
Junior Member
Posts • 1,158
Likes • 98
June 2009
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by Cedric Mnich on Apr 11, 2014 11:24:02 GMT 1, I am a member of the site since last year. I bought 3 shares (C215, LUDO and RERO) for a total of 100 EUR just to give it a try. Prices are steep as you mentioned, the company buys the piece, then doubles the price and expects to sell it even more. It is far better and less expensive to buy prints directly... Regarding the fact of having the piece at home for 3 months, I think it's merely a marketing argument. I doubt anyone has enough shares to do this. The website does not seem to have enough members to make it very liquid. That is, once you have shares, it seems very difficult to sell them and get back your money or a profit (you have to find someone willing to buy your shares or wait for the gallery owned piece to be auctioned...). This site expects to make art as a stock trading game. It's a funny idea but I wouldn't put too much money into it... I won't had more euros in it until the thing gets really liquid, allowing people to exchange shares at will and this would need hundreds or thousands of active members.
I am a member of the site since last year. I bought 3 shares (C215, LUDO and RERO) for a total of 100 EUR just to give it a try. Prices are steep as you mentioned, the company buys the piece, then doubles the price and expects to sell it even more. It is far better and less expensive to buy prints directly... Regarding the fact of having the piece at home for 3 months, I think it's merely a marketing argument. I doubt anyone has enough shares to do this. The website does not seem to have enough members to make it very liquid. That is, once you have shares, it seems very difficult to sell them and get back your money or a profit (you have to find someone willing to buy your shares or wait for the gallery owned piece to be auctioned...). This site expects to make art as a stock trading game. It's a funny idea but I wouldn't put too much money into it... I won't had more euros in it until the thing gets really liquid, allowing people to exchange shares at will and this would need hundreds or thousands of active members.
|
|
Deleted
Posts • 0
Likes •
January 1970
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by Deleted on Apr 11, 2014 11:26:04 GMT 1, Quite an interesting read, not sure how viable it is but the uptake seems relatively decent. 1 share in Heavy Weaponry will set you back £120, Writing on the Wall £44. I guess it's like an art stock exchange of sorts and if you own a quarter of any piece you can take it home for 3 months. here we have only one winner: gallery. They will get commision twice. First when they are selling stock and secondly when they are selling artwork. This is ponzi sheme and nothing more and banksy will finally destroy them all when his prints will come out again.Better out
People are actually buying air; once enough share are sold, then the gallery can let the artwork to the shareholders or keep it in safe house. Galleries even get commission when share are exchange I am sure... then once more artwork is going for sale !!
Better out indeed nonetheless when you see the number of shares already sold; it is scary !! Scary to see also the number and quality of artworks, to good to be true !!
"What a beautiful piece of paer you have here"
"Oh yes, it is framed certificate of ownership of two shares of Haring poster"
"Waaah, impressive"
Quite an interesting read, not sure how viable it is but the uptake seems relatively decent. 1 share in Heavy Weaponry will set you back £120, Writing on the Wall £44. I guess it's like an art stock exchange of sorts and if you own a quarter of any piece you can take it home for 3 months. here we have only one winner: gallery. They will get commision twice. First when they are selling stock and secondly when they are selling artwork. This is ponzi sheme and nothing more and banksy will finally destroy them all when his prints will come out again.Better out Very right !! People are actually buying air; once enough share are sold, then the gallery can let the artwork to the shareholders or keep it in safe house. Galleries even get commission when share are exchange I am sure... then once more artwork is going for sale !! Better out indeed nonetheless when you see the number of shares already sold; it is scary !! Scary to see also the number and quality of artworks, to good to be true !! "What a beautiful piece of paer you have here" "Oh yes, it is framed certificate of ownership of two shares of Haring poster" "Waaah, impressive" |
|
Cedric Mnich
Junior Member
Posts • 1,158
Likes • 98
June 2009
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by Cedric Mnich on Apr 11, 2014 11:33:38 GMT 1, So we found one of the buyers of one of the LUDO sculpture :
www.myartinvest.com/fr/ludo/289-grapes.html
I think it was 50 or 55KUSD at Levine Gallery, is that right ?
|
|
Cedric Mnich
Junior Member
Posts • 1,158
Likes • 98
June 2009
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by Cedric Mnich on Apr 11, 2014 11:41:24 GMT 1, The founder David Bastok was in front of me at the last Artcurial Urban Auction. I can tell you he struggled and bid on the main LUDO piece that was auctioned (but he didn't get it). Marius, sorry but this is not a ponzi scheme. A ponzi scheme actually works on giving a high interest yearly rate to investors based on imaginary profits which are actually made on new investors coming in. Here, there are pieces (true, overpriced) which are kept to be sold with a profit, later on. Now, I agree this site is based on the dematerialization of art, as a piece of investment paper... Greed is behind and Art doesn't have much to do in this... Buying art directly, even if as a mere investment, is by far better.
The founder David Bastok was in front of me at the last Artcurial Urban Auction. I can tell you he struggled and bid on the main LUDO piece that was auctioned (but he didn't get it). Marius, sorry but this is not a ponzi scheme. A ponzi scheme actually works on giving a high interest yearly rate to investors based on imaginary profits which are actually made on new investors coming in. Here, there are pieces (true, overpriced) which are kept to be sold with a profit, later on. Now, I agree this site is based on the dematerialization of art, as a piece of investment paper... Greed is behind and Art doesn't have much to do in this... Buying art directly, even if as a mere investment, is by far better.
|
|
eduarandres
Junior Member
Posts • 1,150
Likes • 114
January 2009
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by eduarandres on Apr 11, 2014 11:43:25 GMT 1, what a con!
what a con!
|
|
johnnyh
Junior Member
Posts • 4,492
Likes • 2,102
March 2011
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by johnnyh on Apr 11, 2014 11:44:01 GMT 1, Yep it's a big con. Share price if all sold are over twice the actual value of the piece. There is no obligation on them to sell the art work so the only return is for someone to buy your shares. The share price will not increase as they are already massively over valued plus they have to sell out before they will put buyers your way. Also as they control the process they I'll sell new buyers new pieces.
They will no doubt buy your shares back at a very low rate.
The true value and increase in a shares price is driven by demand. Because these shares are not based upon a true price of the art work there in no great demand for the shares as it's cheaper to buy the piece or they will sell you shares in another piece. It's not a pons I scheme it's better!!!
Yep it's a big con. Share price if all sold are over twice the actual value of the piece. There is no obligation on them to sell the art work so the only return is for someone to buy your shares. The share price will not increase as they are already massively over valued plus they have to sell out before they will put buyers your way. Also as they control the process they I'll sell new buyers new pieces.
They will no doubt buy your shares back at a very low rate.
The true value and increase in a shares price is driven by demand. Because these shares are not based upon a true price of the art work there in no great demand for the shares as it's cheaper to buy the piece or they will sell you shares in another piece. It's not a pons I scheme it's better!!!
|
|
Deleted
Posts • 0
Likes •
January 1970
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by Deleted on Apr 11, 2014 11:44:34 GMT 1, Hihihi !!!
"Pour appâter les clients, My Art Invest met aussi en avant la possibilité d'exposer une œuvre pendant un mois chez soi dès l'achat de 5 parts. Sympa pour frimer lors d'un dîner entre amis. Sauf que les frais de transport sont à la charge de l'apprenti collectionneur. De plus, il faudra verser une caution, égale à 150% de la cote de l'œuvre. Apprêtez-vous donc à faire un chèque de caution de plus de 20.000 euros pour héberger la gravure sur bois de Damien Hirst, "Methionine". "
Hihihi !!!
"Pour appâter les clients, My Art Invest met aussi en avant la possibilité d'exposer une œuvre pendant un mois chez soi dès l'achat de 5 parts. Sympa pour frimer lors d'un dîner entre amis. Sauf que les frais de transport sont à la charge de l'apprenti collectionneur. De plus, il faudra verser une caution, égale à 150% de la cote de l'œuvre. Apprêtez-vous donc à faire un chèque de caution de plus de 20.000 euros pour héberger la gravure sur bois de Damien Hirst, "Methionine". "
|
|
M
Junior Member
Posts • 1,998
Likes • 581
February 2011
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by M on Apr 11, 2014 12:34:24 GMT 1, Finally can u imagine the situation when the owner of this shitty business has a partnership with auction house.
Finally can u imagine the situation when the owner of this shitty business has a partnership with auction house.
|
|
|
|
t3c
Junior Member
Posts • 1,570
Likes • 703
July 2011
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by t3c on Apr 11, 2014 13:06:57 GMT 1, yeah i was just thinking that M
yeah i was just thinking that M |
|
Deleted
Posts • 0
Likes •
January 1970
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by Deleted on Apr 11, 2014 15:25:29 GMT 1, this is the art equivelent of the CDO...run like the wind or buy a WCP
this is the art equivelent of the CDO...run like the wind or buy a WCP
|
|
t3c
Junior Member
Posts • 1,570
Likes • 703
July 2011
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by t3c on Apr 11, 2014 15:52:30 GMT 1, jesus wept all the Brainwash shares have been bought
jesus wept all the Brainwash shares have been bought
|
|
Deleted
Posts • 0
Likes •
January 1970
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by Deleted on Apr 11, 2014 16:00:40 GMT 1, jesus wept all the Brainwash shares have been bought
MUGS!
jesus wept all the Brainwash shares have been bought haha MUGS! |
|
M
Junior Member
Posts • 1,998
Likes • 581
February 2011
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by M on Apr 11, 2014 20:53:31 GMT 1, It's remind me a guy who creates a company where you can even buy whole gallactic for 40 dollars, stars or planets also. He has one object for sale where all money from shares of that company will end: Black Whole. Norway court of law said that it's legal 
It's remind me a guy who creates a company where you can even buy whole gallactic for 40 dollars, stars or planets also. He has one object for sale where all money from shares of that company will end: Black Whole. Norway court of law said that it's legal |
|
doyle
New Member
Posts • 930
Likes • 743
September 2008
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by doyle on Apr 11, 2014 22:33:40 GMT 1, Apparently, under the FAQ's, you can hang the piece of artwork in your home if you;
- have a min of 25% shares in the piece
-a house alarm,
-insurance
-and send them a deposit amounting to 150% of the price of the whole artwork.
haha ludicrous!
Apparently, under the FAQ's, you can hang the piece of artwork in your home if you;
- have a min of 25% shares in the piece
-a house alarm,
-insurance
-and send them a deposit amounting to 150% of the price of the whole artwork.
haha ludicrous!
|
|
Lesson1
New Member
Posts • 332
Likes • 183
November 2011
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by Lesson1 on Apr 12, 2014 9:40:59 GMT 1, -and send them a deposit amounting to 150% of the price of the whole artwork. haha ludicrous!
!!! Surely defeats the whole idea in the first place (if you join for the love of the art) in that you can't afford the whole piece so get a share
-and send them a deposit amounting to 150% of the price of the whole artwork. haha ludicrous! !!! Surely defeats the whole idea in the first place (if you join for the love of the art) in that you can't afford the whole piece so get a share |
|
gatecrasher
New Member
Posts • 687
Likes • 560
December 2012
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by gatecrasher on Apr 12, 2014 9:56:56 GMT 1, I'm not quite sure who would buy into this.
An investor could easily see they're never going to make a profit on it and what art lover wants a "share" in something they're never going to see.
Easy pass
I'm not quite sure who would buy into this. An investor could easily see they're never going to make a profit on it and what art lover wants a "share" in something they're never going to see. Easy pass |
|
|
|
Deleted
Posts • 0
Likes •
January 1970
|
Article in the Standard last night - My Art Invest, by Deleted on Apr 12, 2014 11:58:26 GMT 1, The founder David Bastok was in front of me at the last Artcurial Urban Auction. I can tell you he struggled and bid on the main LUDO piece that was auctioned (but he didn't get it). Marius, sorry but this is not a ponzi scheme. A ponzi scheme actually works on giving a high interest yearly rate to investors based on imaginary profits which are actually made on new investors coming in. Here, there are pieces (true, overpriced) which are kept to be sold with a profit, later on. Now, I agree this site is based on the dematerialization of art, as a piece of investment paper... Greed is behind and Art doesn't have much to do in this... Buying art directly, even if as a mere investment, is by far better. The grapes piece is on his art invest site so he either got it or maybe did a deal with the buyer??
My view is that no one should get involved in giving money for this type of scheme.
I don't know what type of contract is written up, but can this guy or gallery decide to ask an unsellable price for an artwork meaning people who bought a share could never get their money back?
and if he does manage to sell any art he makes money twice.
Are the shares equivelant to todays market value for the art.
I see he has Banksy Heavy Weaponry and selling 992 parts at 144 euro's a part which is the equivelant of £118,000 quid.
Which seems deluded considering Banksy's high prices peaked around 2007 and 8 and a similar piece sold recently for half that amount.
Sorry but to me this doesn't look like a credible business more like an opportunist looking to make money from mugs attracted to the names.
So he gets to keep the art and all the money 
Does he actually own all the art that he is selling parts or shares in? Or does he have it on consignment?
Another point is thats is this a gallery selling art and it's a bad sign if galleries have art that they cannot sell so resort to schemes getting people to give them money.
It's been done before by some galleries in the USA.
Are some of todays contemporary galleries struggling to sell art?
It's better to buy originals for low prices from up and coming or unknown artists and use ones instinct to build up a collection which could be a far better investment.
That's how some of the bigest art dealers in history did it.
This article below is nothing to do with the guy selling parts
but a report on the contemporary art market today and the insurance claims being made by some galleries in order to get money for art they cannot sell.
www.theartnewspaper.com/articles/Art-insurers-on-high-alert-for-fraudulent-claims/18707
The founder David Bastok was in front of me at the last Artcurial Urban Auction. I can tell you he struggled and bid on the main LUDO piece that was auctioned (but he didn't get it). Marius, sorry but this is not a ponzi scheme. A ponzi scheme actually works on giving a high interest yearly rate to investors based on imaginary profits which are actually made on new investors coming in. Here, there are pieces (true, overpriced) which are kept to be sold with a profit, later on. Now, I agree this site is based on the dematerialization of art, as a piece of investment paper... Greed is behind and Art doesn't have much to do in this... Buying art directly, even if as a mere investment, is by far better. The grapes piece is on his art invest site so he either got it or maybe did a deal with the buyer??
My view is that no one should get involved in giving money for this type of scheme.
I don't know what type of contract is written up, but can this guy or gallery decide to ask an unsellable price for an artwork meaning people who bought a share could never get their money back?
and if he does manage to sell any art he makes money twice.
Are the shares equivelant to todays market value for the art.
I see he has Banksy Heavy Weaponry and selling 992 parts at 144 euro's a part which is the equivelant of £118,000 quid.
Which seems deluded considering Banksy's high prices peaked around 2007 and 8 and a similar piece sold recently for half that amount.
Sorry but to me this doesn't look like a credible business more like an opportunist looking to make money from mugs attracted to the names.
So he gets to keep the art and all the money
Does he actually own all the art that he is selling parts or shares in? Or does he have it on consignment?
Another point is thats is this a gallery selling art and it's a bad sign if galleries have art that they cannot sell so resort to schemes getting people to give them money.
It's been done before by some galleries in the USA.
Are some of todays contemporary galleries struggling to sell art?
It's better to buy originals for low prices from up and coming or unknown artists and use ones instinct to build up a collection which could be a far better investment.
That's how some of the bigest art dealers in history did it.
This article below is nothing to do with the guy selling parts
but a report on the contemporary art market today and the insurance claims being made by some galleries in order to get money for art they cannot sell.
www.theartnewspaper.com/articles/Art-insurers-on-high-alert-for-fraudulent-claims/18707
|
|
